However, Dr. Oden observes that universalism fails because:

1.  A pungent series of Jesus’ parables – the tares, the net, the marriage feast, the wise and foolish virgins, the talents, the pounds – focuses upon opportunities forever lost, trust abused, final exclusion and rejection.  Without the theme of ultimate exclusion from the presence of the holy God, these parables lose their force.

2.  It is not merely later church teaching but Jesus Himself and Paul the Apostle who constantly remind hearers that there are sins that exclude one from the kingdom of God (Matthew 5:29-30; 10:28; 23:15, 33; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Galatians 5:20-21; Ephesians 5:5).

On those two basis alone we can see that the force of the New Testament is against universalism.  I agree with the Bible’s teaching on an unlimited atonement (John 3:16) but I deny that Christ’s death on the cross alone secures salvation for anyone.  That Christ died does not save.  The appropriation of faith to the finished work of Christ is what saves.  Notice with me Romans 3:23-26:

23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Or 1 Timothy 4:10:

For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.

There is a sense in which Jesus is the Savior of the world (John 1:29; 4:42; 1 John 4:14) but only those who place their saving faith in Jesus Christ become the elect of God.  Only the elect of God will be in heaven (Revelation 20:15; 21:7-8).  Jesus alone is the way to heaven (John 14:6).  We cannot approach God through any other means but through Christ alone who is the mediator between God and humans (1 Timothy 2:5).

Let us do all we can to evangelize the nations for the glory of our God!

I am not conscious to myself, of having taught or entertained any other sentiments concerning the justification of man before God, than those which are held unanimously by the Reformed and Protestant Churches, and which are in complete agreement with their expressed opinions.

There was lately a short controversy in relation to this subject, between John Piscator, Professor of Divinity in the University of Herborn in Nassau, and the French Churches. It consisted in the determination of these two questions:

(1.) “is the obedience or righteousness of Christ, which is imputed to believers and in which consists their righteousness before God, is this only the passive obedience of Christ?” which was Piscator’s opinion. Or

(2.) “is it not, in addition to this, that active righteousness of Christ which he exhibited to the law of God in the whole course of his life, and that holiness in which he was conceived?” Which was the opinion of the French Churches. But I never durst mingle myself with the dispute, or undertake to decide it; for I thought it possible for the Professors of the same religion to hold different opinions on this point from others of their brethren, without any breach of Christian peace or the unity of faith. Similar peaceful thoughts appear to have been indulged by both the adverse parties in this dispute; for they exercised a friendly toleration towards each other, and did not make that a reason for mutually renouncing their fraternal concord. But concerning such an amicable plan of adjusting differences, certain individuals in our own country are of a different judgment.

A question has been raised from these words of the Apostle Paul: “Faith is imputed for righteousness.” (Rom. 4) The inquiry was,

(1.) Whether those expressions ought to be properly understood, “so that faith itself, as an act performed according to the command of the gospel, is imputed before God for or unto righteousness — and that of grace; since it is not the righteousness of the law.”

(2.) Whether they ought to be figuratively and improperly understood, “that the righteousness of Christ, being apprehended by faith, is imputed to us for righteousness.” Or

(3.) Whether it is to be understood “that the righteousness, for which, or unto which, faith is imputed, is the instrumental operation of faith;” which is asserted by some persons. In the theses on justification, which were disputed under me when I was moderator, I have adopted the former of these opinions not in a rigid manner, but simply, as I have likewise done in another passage which I wrote in a particular letter. It is on this ground that I am accounted to hold and to teach unsound opinions concerning the justification of man before God. But how unfounded such a supposition is, will be very evident at a proper season, and in a mutual conference. For the present, I will only briefly say, “I believe that sinners are accounted righteous solely by the obedience of Christ; and that the righteousness of Christ is the only meritorious cause on account of which God pardons the sins of believers and reckons them as righteous as if they had perfectly fulfilled the law. But since God imputes the righteousness of Christ to none except believers, I conclude that, in this sense, it may be well and properly said, to a man who believes, faith is imputed for righteousness through grace, because God hath set forth his Son, Jesus Christ, to be a propitiation, a throne of grace, [or mercy seat] through faith in his blood.” Whatever interpretation may be put upon these expressions, none of our Divines blames Calvin or considers him to be heterodox on this point; yet my opinion is not so widely different from his as to prevent me from employing the signature of my own hand in subscribing to those things which he has delivered on this subject, in the third book of his Institutes; this I am prepared to do at any time, and to give them my full approval. Most noble and potent Lords, these are the principal articles, respecting which I have judged it necessary to declare my opinion before this august meeting, in obedience to your commands.

The day of Pentecost marked a transformation in the plan of God.  The people of God would now be the people of the Spirit.  All people could enjoy being the people of God through the ministry of the Spirit (John 10:16).  The gift of the Spirit would not be given to only the Jews but to all people who would come and be saved through faith in Christ Jesus (Acts 2:21; Galatians 3:13-14).  In fact, Paul the Apostle would later write in Romans 8:9 that if any person does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.  The baptism by the Holy Spirit into the body of Christ is essential to salvation (1 Corinthians 12:12-13).

I rejoice that the Comforter has come.  When my mother passed away last August, the Holy Spirit was a sweet friend to me.  I rejoiced time and time again at the words of Jesus in John 14:26-27 (KJV):

26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.

The Comforter was a dear friend to me as I grieved the loss of my mama.  I sensed His sweet presence.  I sensed His praying (Romans 8:26-27).  I sensed His security (Ephesians 1:13-14).  I sensed His gentle loving hand upon me.  He brought me through.

And He has done this other times as well.  How often have I felt like giving up and felt like I didn’t want to pray anymore.  Yet the gentle love of the Comforter has always been my strength to help me rise up and seek God.  I rejoice that He is not just my Comforter but He also is my convictor (John 16:8).  He gently deals with me about my sins.  The Holy Spirit never condemns me but He gently and lovingly shows me my sins.  He does not lead me to condemnation (Romans 8:1) but He gently leads me to forgiveness in Christ (1 John 1:9).  What a precious friend He is.

This day, I rejoice in the Comforter.  I rejoice that He has come.  I rejoice that He has filled me.  I rejoice that He abides with me both now and forevermore.  I pray that I would not grieve Him (Ephesians 4:30).  I pray that He would be my guide forever.

Is this not the fulfillment of Romans 1:18-32?  Here we have ESPN seeking to drum up a war cry against a private Christian college that has the right to do whatever they desire regarding this sin.  We don’t hear them going after BYU for their honor code (a code which continues to earn BYU the label of “worst party school” by Playboy magazine).  Why does ESPN have the right to condemn a private school for their own free views regarding homosexuality?

From a biblical worldview, we should not be surprised at ESPN nor the world for attacking the Church regarding standing against sin.  We will be hated for our pursuit of holiness.  Peter the Apostle warns us of this in 1 Peter 4:3-5 where he wrote:

3 For the time that is past suffices for doing what the Gentiles want to do, living in sensuality, passions, drunkenness, orgies, drinking parties, and lawless idolatry. 4 With respect to this they are surprised when you do not join them in the same flood of debauchery, and they malign you; 5 but they will give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead.

We should pray for Brittney Griner.  I don’t begin to know her struggle with her sins.  I confess that I have never battled the sin of homosexuality but I have battled the sin of lust and my prayer for her is to be saved by God’s grace (Romans 10:1).  I can’t begin to know the depth of her guilt for her sins.  God knows and God can deliver her from her sin (1 Corinthians 6:9-11).  Jesus is more than able to set the homosexual or the adulterer or the blasphemer free from their sins (1 John 1:9).  Jesus came to deliver us from our sins (Matthew 1:21) and He is able to help us overcome sin (1 Corinthians 10:13).  I pray that the Spirit of God would convict Miss Griner and show her His grace (Titus 2:11-12).

I also pray that the Church of Jesus Christ would continue to preach the truth of God.  Don’t back down Church from teaching that God hates sin and that all sin leads to death (Romans 6:23).  Proclaim God’s truth that salvation is available to all who repent (Luke 13:5; Acts 2:38-39; 3:19-20; 17:30-31; Romans 2:4).  Our passion should be to preach the grace of God to save sinners (Ephesians 2:8-9) and He is a mighty Savior from sin (2 Corinthians 5:18-21).

Yet why did God create Satan and why did God allow him to fall?  These answers are not easy.  Whether a Calvinist who holds to divine determinism and would view Satan as part of the plan of God and the will of God to us Arminians who hold that God is exhaustive in His foreknowledge and thus He knew that Satan would fall but He created him to the open theist who holds that Satan reflects the reality that God created a world that is free and thus Satan fell out of his own free will and his rebellion continues to this day.  In fact, Dr. Greg Boyd has written two books on the subject of spiritual warfare and free will theism.  Dr. Boyd, an open theist and perhaps the leading theologian among them, believes that the cross itself shows that God is at war with Satan.  Satan is not equal but he does war against God and against His plans.

I am sure that you too have heard much about Satan and some was good and some was bad.  I remember fearing Satan when I was lost especially as a boy.  I feared that Satan was out to kill me as I heard from John 10:10.  When I was first saved, I encountered people who saw the devil everywhere.  I remember going to hear an African brother speak and he said that he had seen Satan and his demons many times in Africa.  He went on to say that he had seen the same demons at the mall earlier that day not so much in possession of souls but in the love of money and the boasting of life (James 4:13-16).  I personally watched a man try to cast a demon out of woman.  It was more bizarre than biblical.  However, I did see a woman once drop on the floor of a church and begin to move like a snake on the floor.  A man in the back came up and begin to cast a demon out and she let out a horrible sounding cry from deep within.  She was delivered that night and became a prayer warrior at that church.

I do believe in Satan.  I have never met him as far as I know.  I pray that I don’t.  However, I know that Jesus is victorious and I know that He has already overcome (Hebrews 2:14).  What I want to study is why does Satan exist?  What is his purpose?  Does Scripture give us answers to these questions?  What do we make of Satan if in fact there is no true free will?  Why does Satan tempt disciples of Jesus if in fact they are secure forever?

I may post on these topics from time to time but I simply wanted to throw these questions out there as to what I am pondering in my mind these days.

Needless to say, I never got a Dakes Bible.  Until a friend just gave me one out of the blue about two years ago.  Now before I jump into my edition, let me state that while in college I heard a brother give a lecture against the Dakes Bible so I knew some things about it.  For instance, the brother showed some strange concepts Dake had in his notes such as the pre-Adamite world supposedly in Genesis 1:2, the “little gods” theory where Dake said that man was a little god (much like Word-Faith teachers such as Kenneth Copeland have espoused), and his racial theories (segregation).

From the outset, I must admit that it is easy to just want to read all the notes in this Bible.  I would venture to say that  this Bible has the most notes I have ever seen.  Some are very good.  Some are not so good.  Some are sometimes just short topical studies on a subject.  The notes are not in expository form per se but they do relate to the book that Dake is covering at the time.  Dake, at least from the notes, was a thinker and his ability to topically put passages together is amazing.

The negative aspects of this Bible are the problems stated above.  There is no doubt that Dakes included these theories in his notes.  Further, while I appreciate some of the aspects of the Dakes Bible emphasis on the power of God (such as in Acts 10:38), overall I didn’t learn too much from this Bible.  It seems this Bible is made for Bible studies and outlines.  Not specifically to deal with answering the texts.  Further, the problems above such as “little gods” or his racial theories is enough to keep me away from recommending this Bible.  With the likes of the ESV Study Bible or the Fire Bible out there, I would rather recommend those.

You can find the piece here.

1.  Black & Tan by Douglas Wilson.

2.  Faithful Lightning by Allen Guelzo.

3.  Azusa Street: How Pentecost Came to Los Angeles by Frank Bartleman.

4.  Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin by Timothy Snyder.

5.  Kings of Cocaine by Guy Gugliotta and Jeff Leen.

6.  Killing Calvinism by Greg Dutcher.

7.  Classic Christianity by Thomas Oden.

8.  Romans by Jack Cottrell.

9.  Revival Praying by Leonard Ravenhill.

10.  ESV Study Bible
“Classic’ – a book which people praise and don’t read.” – Mark Twain